Mémoire d’un achèvement. Approches de la fin dans les Histoire(s) du cinéma, de Jean-Luc Godard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Une des avenues les plus riches pour penser la fin au cinéma consiste à replacer sa question au plus près d’une pensée de la fin du cinéma. Cet article tentera d’interroger le sens de cette fin, comme lieu de sens, à partir et autour des Histoire(s) du cinéma (1987-1998), de Jean-Luc Godard. Il ne s’agira pas d’investir toute l’étendue de la question ni de proposer un historique de ces multiples « morts du cinéma », mais de tracer un certain nombre de pistes pour l’envisager, à partir de celles que les Histoire(s) proposent. D’abord, on se demandera si la fin du cinéma, pour Godard, n’est pas l’occasion d’un retour sur ce qui l’a perdu ou sur son origine (ses promesses, ses possibilités) et si, en un deuxième temps, le repiquage vidéastique ne s’offre pas comme une façon de réaliser, à rebours, le souvenir de certaines de ses potentialités, trahies ou méconnues.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".